Would anyone know why these carriers didn't have their flight deck extended from bow to stern?
On both the flight deck is set back from the bow by almost 60 feet. That not only limits landing and parking space on deck for aircraft, but also limits available hanger space - a common drawback of British designed carriers.
The only reason I can think of is that weight may have been an issue. Thoughts?
Aircraft carriers Glorious and Courageous
Re: Aircraft carriers Glorious and Courageous
The original design had two flight decks with a short flying off deck below the main one to provide flexibility in launch & recovery operations. It was only when more modern aircraft required longer take-offs that the lower deck became obsolete.
Re: Aircraft carriers Glorious and Courageous
Thanks Huck. So is there any reason why the Carriers were not then modified to extend the upper flight deck?
Re: Aircraft carriers Glorious and Courageous
the British felt no need, as the British did not use deck parking there would no real gain in just extending the flight deck. British carrier operations methods with out deck parking would have been in no way made better by extending the flight deck.
Re: Aircraft carriers Glorious and Courageous
Cheers Pugs.